ARTICLE 38

The tribunal decides on the choice of languages to be used by itself, and to be authorized for use before it.

ARTICLE 39

As a general rule arbitration procedure comprises two distinct phases: pleadings and oral discussions.

The pleadings consist in the communication by the respective agents to the members of the tribunal and the opposite party of all printed or written acts and of all documents containing the grounds relied on in the case. This communication shall be made in the form and within the time fixed by the tribunal in accordance with Article 49.

The discussions consist in the oral development before the tribunal of the arguments of the parties.

ARTICLE 40

Every document produced by one party must be communicated to the other party.

ARTICLE 41

[68] The discussions are under the direction of the president.

They are only public if it be so decided by the tribunal, with the assent of the parties.

They are recorded in the minutes drawn up by the secretaries appointed by the president. These minutes alone have an authentic character.

ARTICLE 42

After the close of the pleadings, the tribunal is entitled to refuse discussion of all new papers or documents which one of the parties may wish to submit to it without the consent of the other party.

ARTICLE 43

The tribunal is free to take into consideration new papers or documents to which its attention may be drawn by the agents or counsel of the parties.

In this case, the tribunal has the right to require the production of these papers or documents, but is obliged to make them known to the opposite party.

ARTICLE 44

The tribunal can, besides, require from the agents of the parties the production of all papers, and can demand all necessary explanations. In case of refusal, the tribunal takes note of it.

ARTICLE 45

The agents and counsel of the parties are authorized to present orally to the tribunal all the arguments they may consider expedient in defense of their case.

ARTICLE 46

They are entitled to raise objections and points. The decisions of the tribunal on these points are final, and cannot form the subject of any subsequent discussion.

ARTICLE 47

The members of the tribunal are entitled to put questions to the agents and counsel of the parties, and to ask them for explanations on doubtful points.

Neither the questions put nor the remarks made by members of the tribunal in the course of the discussions can be regarded as an expression of opinion by the tribunal in. general, or by its members in particular.

ARTICLE 48

The tribunal is authorized to declare its competence in interpreting the compromis as well as the other treaties which may be invoked in the case, and in applying the principles of international law.

ARTICLE 49

The tribunal is entitled to issue rules of procedure for the conduct of the case, to decide the forms and time in which each party must conclude its arguments, and to arrange all the formalities required for dealing with the evidence.

ARTICLE 50

When the agents and counsel of the parties have submitted all the explanations and evidence in support of their case, the president pronounces the discussion closed.

ARTICLE 51

The deliberations of the tribunal take place in private. Every decision is taken by a majority of members of the tribunal.

The refusal of a member to vote must be recorded in the minutes.

ARTICLE 52

The award, given by a majority of votes, must state the reasons on which it is based. It is drawn up in writing and signed by each member of the tribunal.

Those members who are in the minority may record their dissent when signing.

ARTICLE 53

The award is read out at a public sitting of the tribunal, the agents and counsel of the parties being present or duly summoned to attend.

ARTICLE 54

The award, fully pronounced and notified to the agents of the parties at variance, settles the dispute definitively and without appeal.

ARTICLE 55

The parties can reserve in the compromis the right to demand the revision of the award.

In this case, and unless there be an agreement to the contrary, the demand must be addressed to the tribunal which pronounced the award. It can only be made on the ground of the discovery of some new fact which is of a nature to exercise a decisive influence upon the award, and which, at the time the discussion was closed, was unknown to the tribunal and to the party demanding the revision.

Proceedings for revision can only be instituted by a decision of the tribunal expressly [69] recording the existence of the new fact, recognizing in it the character described in the preceding paragraph, and declaring the demand admissible on this ground. The compromis fixes the period within which the demand for revision must be made.

ARTICLE 56

The award is binding only on the parties who concluded the compromis.

When there is a question as to the interpretation of a convention to which Powers other than those in dispute are parties, the latter notify to the former the compromis they have concluded. Each of these Powers is entitled to intervene in the case. If one or more avail themselves of this right, the interpretation contained in the award is equally binding on them.

ARTICLE 57

Each party pays its own expenses and an equal share of the expenses of the tribunal.

The Count de Macedo states that he has requested the floor simply to declare that he withdraws the reservations which he formulated at the meeting of June 20, last, on the occasion of the final vote taken on the ten articles concerning the application of the principles of the Geneva Convention to maritime wars; but that, since he has the honor of speaking before the Conference just after the unanimous approval of the fundamental part of the draft convention respecting mediation and arbitration, he will take the liberty of saying a few words for the purpose of expressing on this last subject a regret that is entirely personal and a sentiment of patriotic satisfaction. The regret arises from the fact that, by a combination of circumstances easily understood, in which, certainly, predominates the comparative personal inability of the speaker in this areopagus of eminent men, the Portuguese delegation has been able to take only a very small and modest part; that it has contributed little, save its vote and conciliatory attitude, towards the accomplishment of this truly important and essential part of the work of the Conference. The satisfaction has its origin in the sincere and patriotic conviction that nevertheless his country will have the right to claim a part, at least as important and influential as that belonging to any other nation represented in this high assembly, of the glory of this great work of humanity, of progress and of peace. For Portugal will have contributed to it, and in a greater degree than any other country, by example as by act, as he is about to demonstrate.

In reality, Portugal and Holland are up to the present the only countries who have concluded and ratified a convention, submitting to arbitration all differences between them with the single reservation of the questions touching the autonomy or the independence of one of the two nations. Count DE MACEDO thinks that he should still add, for it cannot be denied that such facts have a great suggestive value, that Portugal had in the last half century only five really important international differences, which she has been able to settle promptly and easily through simple, direct negotiations. In all these five cases, his country has invoked mediation or arbitration; he will abstain, through motives of propriety easily understood, from enumerating them, especially since that would be unnecessary before an assembly so enlightened; but he says that in two of these five cases in which an arrangement for arbitration was made, the arbiter ruled in favor of Portugal; in a third case where an eventual mediation has been accepted, such mere prefatory agreement led in a short time to settlement through direct and friendly negotiations. In the other two cases, those in which settlement by arbitration or even by mediation was not accepted, the differences were adjusted in a way entirely adverse to the Portuguese claims. These facts, well known, are by their special circumstances too suggestive for the Count DE MACEDO not to believe he has the right to consider them very influential. (Applause.) The President then reads the following declaration:

The delegation of the United States of America on signing the Convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes, as proposed by the International Peace Conference, makes the following declaration:

Nothing contained in this Convention shall be so construed as to require the United States of America to depart from its traditional policy of not

intruding upon, interfering with, or entangling itself in the political questions or policy of international administration of any foreign State; nor shall anything in the said Convention be construed to imply a relinquishment by the United States of its traditional attitude toward purely American questions.

The PRESIDENT places on record this declaration of the delegation of the United States of America.

The draft is adopted in whole.

[70] The President says that before entering upon the next subject in the order of the day, he asks the Conference to unite with him in addressing their fullest thanks to the statesman who has presided over the work of the Third Commission.

We all (said he) have applauded his earnestness and eloquence; we all have sincerely admired the tact and impartiality with which he has guided the debates. As to our reporter, I shall say to him that his name will remain intimately bound up with the draft that you have just adopted. His report is a monument of knowledge and system and represents invaluable intellectual effort.

Let us thank also the committee of examination, its secretary, Baron d'Estournelles, and all its members, statesmen and jurists, who have facilitated our task and cleared the way before us. (Great applause.)

His Excellency Turkhan Pasha makes the following declaration:

The Turkish delegation, considering that the work of this Conference has been a work of high loyalty and humanity, destined solely to assure general peace by safeguarding the interests and the rights of each one, declares, in the name of its Government, that it adheres to the project just adopted, on the following conditions:

1. It is formally understood that recourse to good offices and mediation, to commissions of inquiry and arbitration is purely facultative and could not in any case assume an obligatory character or degenerate into intervention;

2. The Imperial Government itself will be the judge of the cases where its interests would permit it to admit these methods without its abstention or refusal to have recourse to them being considered by the signatory States as an unfriendly act.

It goes without saying that in no case could the means in question be applied to questions concerning interior regulation.

The declaration of His Excellency TURKHAN PASHA is recorded.

His Excellency Sir Julian Pauncefote asks to turn back to Article 53 of the Regulations adopted for the laws and customs of war. He recalls that, on the request of Mr. BILLE, shore ends of cables were added to the land telegraphs mentioned in this article. The British Government is of the opinion that if protection of telegraphic material on land may enter into the object of the deliberations of the Conference, the extension of the provision to cables that extend under the sea for a distance often considerable, would exceed the competence of this assembly from which it has been agreed to exclude naval

matters.

Sir JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE hopes that, in a spirit of conciliation, Mr. BILLE will withdraw, with the approval of the Conference, the amendment that he had offered to Article 53.

Mr. Bille replies:

My Government will learn with regret that the first delegate of Great Britain is opposed to the amendment respecting shore ends of cables, adopted by the Conference and inserted in Article 53 of the draft convention relative to the laws and customs of war on land.

At the same time, but merely to avoid having this opposition and the reservation following it become at the last hour an obstacle to the unanimous acceptance of a draft convention which does honor to the Peace Conference and marks progress in the law of nations, I am authorized to withdraw the amendment in question and to declare at the same time that my Government does not remain less convinced of the justice of the existing reasons for giving submarine cables, and with still greater reason the shore ends of cables, the same protection in war as is assured to land telegraphs.

My Government takes note of the support that the Conference, by its former vote, has given to the principle involved; it recognizes that the exclusion of questions of maritime law necessarily prevented the question of submarine cables from being treated by this Conference as it deserves; it now confines itself to repeating its hope that this question will be taken into serious consideration by the Powers without delay.

The President states that on account of the declarations which have just been made, the text of Article 53 must be modified. He consults the Conference to ascertain whether it approves this modification as reached by agreement between Sir JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE and Mr. BILLE.

Mr. Bille repeats that he has withdrawn his amendment, in the desire of leaving Article 53 unanimously agreed to. He adds that if anyone should feel obliged to take it up again, he would consider it his duty to align himself with the new motion.

The President asks if it is desired to vote by roll-call.

Mr. Beldiman says that he has favored the amendment presented by Mr. BILLE and that his Government was entirely favorable to it. He thinks, [71] however, that this is not the time to renew the discussion. Although of the same opinion as Mr. BILLE, that there is an essential difference between submarine cables and that these latter alone fall under the law of maritime war, he will willingly give up the proposed amendment if this renunciation would bring about the adhesion of Great Britain to the whole of the Convention on the laws and customs of war.

His Excellency Sir Julian Pauncefote replies that he is not authorized to make a promise of this kind. He says that the amendment of Mr. BILLE was the only objection that had so far been presented to him by his Government on the adopted regulations. He does not believe that other difficulties will be raised; but he can not make such an engagement as Mr. BELDIMAN asks.

Mr. Martens says that the agreement arrived at between Sir JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE and Mr. BILLE gives a real hope of resulting in the unanimous signature of the Convention.

No one requesting the floor, the President says that the modification of Article 53, requested by the first delegate of Great Britain and accepted by the first delegate of Denmark, is adopted without vote.

The PRESIDENT gives the floor to Mr. Renault who presents an oral report on the work of the drafting committee of the Final Act.